Does All Mean All?

BibleHelp ^ | Michael Bronson

[xzins]

As mentioned in a previous chapter, Selective Salvationists have said the verses that say salvation is offered to all don't actually mean salvation is offered to the entire world. To prove their point, they quote Romans 3:23 ("For all have sinned …"). They say since Jesus had never sinned, the word "all" doesn't actually mean all. They say the word "all" can actually be much smaller than 100%.

The above interpretation highlights the importance of looking at the context (surrounding verses) of a verse. The surrounding verses (v. 22,24,25) present Jesus as the solution to the sin problem. Since Jesus is proclaimed to be the solution, it is obvious He is not part of the problem. Therefore, the reasonable interpretation is the word "all" means the entire world excluding Jesus. The surrounding verses give us the authority to exclude Jesus from the list.

Although I believe the 100 plus verses that say salvation is offered to "all" (etc.) is sufficient proof that open salvation is true, there appears to be a need for more proof. What we need are verses that explicitly say salvation is offered to the wholeworld. Verses like these should settle the question once and for all because there can be only one type of interpretation for them.

Fortunately, there are verses that say salvation is offered to the whole world. In fact, since there are over a dozen of these verses, you would think this would be the end of the argument. Incredibly, Selective Salvationists still say these verses apply only to the elect.

Unfortunately for the Selective Salvationists, this type of interpretation does not work with many of these verses. Many of these verses don't make sense when you apply this type of interpretation to them. Listed below are a couple of examples.

• John says in 1 John 2:2, "And He is the propitiation for our sins, and not ours only, but also for the sins of the whole world." According to Selective Salvationists, this verse should read "And He is the propitiation for the sins of the elect, and not only for the elect, but also for the sins of the elect."
  
  This, of course, does not make any sense. Selective Salvationists are now in a bind. Either they have to hold to an interpretation that doesn't make sense or they have to admit that this verse is actually saying that Jesus is the propitiation for the sins of the whole world. If this is the case, selective salvation cannot be true.

• John 3:16 ("For God so loved the world") is another example of the problems Selective Salvationists have when reinterpreting the word "world." They say the word "world" is only referring to the elect. However, this interpretation causes problems in the surrounding verses. In verses 16-19, the word "world" is used five times. Verse 19 says, "And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men love darkness rather than light because their deeds were evil." Here, the word "world" cannot be referring to only the elect; it has to be referring to the whole world.

 

Listed below are verses that say Jesus died for the world

1 John 2:1, 2	Jesus didn't die only for our sins, but for the sins of the whole world
1 John 4:14	Jesus is the Savior of the world
1 Timothy 1:15	Christ Jesus came into the world to save sinners
2 Cor. 5:14, 19	Christ died for all and He wants to bring the world to Himself
2 Cor. 5:19	God was reconciling the world to himself in Christ
John 1:29	Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world
John 16:8	He will convict the world of guilt
John 18:23	Jesus asked God to let the world know He sent Jesus and loved them as much as He loved Jesus
John 3:16	For God so loved the world
John 3:17	God did not send the Son to condemn the world … but to save the world through Him
John 4:42	Jesus is the Savior of the world
John 6:51	This bread is my flesh, which I will give for the life of the world
John 8:12	I am the light of the world
John 9:5	I am the light of the world

  

  

 

An interesting side story about the meaning of words

One of my jobs at the prison where I work is to strip search prisoners coming in from off the streets. When a prisoner steps into the room, I tell him he has to take everything off for the strip-search. About 40% of the time the prisoner will strip down to his T-shirt and long underwear. After several seconds of my staring at his face, he will say, "What, you want me to take more off?"

I'll respond by saying, "Everything must come off."

He will strip down to his underwear and socks and then stop. Again, I say, "Everything means everything."

He will then take off his socks and say, "Underwear too?"

Again I will say, "Everything means everything."

What was the source of this confusion? Did he not understand what was being asked of him? Was there an understandable reason to interpret my instructions differently from the obvious interpretation? No, of course not. The meaning of my instructions was plain and simple. The prisoner deliberately chose to ignore the obvious intent of my instructions in the hopes I wouldn't make him strip all the way.

I have found most of the confusion over "interpretation" of the Bible doesn't come from a lack of understanding of what's being said. It is usually an issue of the person not wanting to accept the clear message. He deliberately altered the meaning to conform to his doctrinal stance or agenda.

 

  

 

[jtminton]

I've never met a Calvinist that wasn't one of the chosen. Funny how that works.

[xzins]

2Pe 2:1 But there were false prophets also among the people, even as there shall be false teachers among you, who privily shall bring in damnable heresies, even denying the Lord that bought them, and bring upon themselves swift destruction.

The above verse makes evidently, absolutely clear that Jesus died even for the false, heretical teachers.

[Protagoras]

I've never met a Calvinist that wasn't one of the chosen. Funny how that works.

Ever met any Christian who wasn't?

[ksen]

Calvin on I John 2:1-2:

2. And not for ours only. He added this for the sake of amplifying, in order that the faithful might be assured that the expiation made by Christ, extends to all who by faith embrace the gospel.

Here a question may be raised, how have the sins of the whole world been expiated? I pass by the dotages of the fanatics, who under this pretense extend salvation to all the reprobate, and therefore to Satan himself. Such a monstrous thing deserves no refutation. They who seek to avoid this absurdity, have said that Christ 1 suffered sufficiently for the whole world, but efficiently only for the elect. This solution has commonly prevailed in the schools. Though then I allow that what has been said is true, yet I deny that it is suitable to this passage; for the design of John was no other than to make this benefit common to the whole Church. Then under the word all or whole, he does not include the reprobate, but designates those who should believe as well as those who were then scattered through various parts of the world. For then is really made evident, as it is meet, the grace of Christ, when it is declared to be the only true salvation of the world.

I can see how I John 2:2 can be interpreted to say that Jesus not died for "our" (recipients of John's letter) sins but also for the sins of the "whole world" (the Church scattered throughout the whole world and down through the ages).

[xzins]

Your interp. doesn't align with 2 Pe 2:1, posted above.

[dakine]

Seeing title, I was thinking poker thread....

[HarleyD]

"For those whom He foreknew, He also predestined to become conformed to the image of His Son, so that He would be the firstborn among many brethren." Rom 8:29

Since Christ died for the "whole world" God really didn't "foreknow" those who would choose Him.

[Blzbba]

"They say since Jesus had never sinned, "


Not true. He failed to honor thy father & mother when he disobeyed them at age 12 to listen to teachings.

Also, if he'd never sinned, why'd he need baptism from John the Baptist?

[ksen]

The above verse makes evidently, absolutely clear that Jesus died even for the false, heretical teachers.

Calvin on II Peter 2:1:

Even denying the Lord that bought them. Though Christ may be denied in various ways, yet Peter, as I think, refers here to what is expressed by Jude, that is, when the grace of God is turned into lasciviousness; for Christ redeemed us, that he might have a people separated from all the pollutions of the world, and devoted to holiness ,and innocency. They, then, who throw off the bridle, and give themselves up to all kinds of licentiousness, are not unjustly said to deny Christ by whom they have been redeemed. Hence, that the doctrine of the gospel may remain whole and complete among us, let this be fixed in our minds, that we have been redeemed by Christ, that he may be the Lord of our life and of our death, and that our main object ought to be, to live to him and to die to him. He then says, that their swift destruction was at hand, lest others should be ensnared by them.

So the verse, according to Calvin, does not teach that Jesus died for unbelieving false teachers, but for believers who have turned aside to false teaching and are teaching their heresy as true.

[jkl1122]

Hebrews 4:15

"For we have not an high priest which cannot be touched with the feeling of our infirmities; but was in all points tempted like as [we are, yet] without sin"

[xzins]

There is no indication that he sinned at age 12, only that he worried his parents....nor do his parents indicate he had sinned.

[R. Scott]

They say the word "all" can actually be much smaller than 100%.

Must be democrats.

[xzins]

foreknow

The sacrifice was valuable enough to pay for all. Therefore, anyone who believes will be saved. Those who reject the good thing done for them will not be saved, even though the sacrifice was valuable enough to cover them, too.

[HarleyD]

If God knew how many would come to Him and who they would be, then why would Christ sacrifice include those who God knew would reject Him?

[xzins]

Verse 2:3 says they are going to their damnation See Strong's note below.

Strong's Number: 684 Browse Lexicon Original Word Word Origin ajpwvleia from a presumed derivative of (622) Transliterated Word TDNT Entry Apoleia 1:396,67 Phonetic Spelling Parts of Speech ap-o'-li-a Noun Feminine Definition destroying, utter destruction of vessels a perishing, ruin, destruction of money the destruction which consists of eternal misery in hell

As you can see, these false teachers are tares and not wheat.

[xzins]

Because God does not show favoritism, and wanted the offer to go out to all.

"Whosoever will may come."

That would not be true, if it only included the price for those who actually got on the bus.

It would be like what the Veteran's Administration has done with veterans. They say that any veteran can come, but when the vets came in higher numbers than expected the last few years, those vets discover that they are turned away because congress didn't budget enough for all who showed up.

The blood of Christ's sacrifice was enough to pay for the offer to all and, therefore, no one can question the integrity of God.

[asformeandformyhouse]

If God knew how many would come to Him and who they would be, then why would Christ sacrifice include those who God knew would reject Him?

Ever invite someone knowing that they wouldn't show up?

[Blzbba]

Thanks for your replies and not taking offense!

Still, if Jesus was without sin, why did he need baptism?

[ksen]

Still, if Jesus was without sin, why did he need baptism?

You're assuming that water baptism cleanses sin. That is not the case. Jesus' baptism signalled the beginning of His teaching ministry. It served as a sort of setting Him apart for God's service (even though He had always been set aside for service, this served as a public show of that setting apart).